Forum Replies Created
27 January 2013 at 19:37 #2021
I think Moffat’s idea is that everything we think we know about the Doctor is wrong. There’s so many doubles, and gangers, and mirrors wandering around; not only is the Doctor not who we think he is, he’s not who he thinks he is.
Doctor Who? The question that must not be answered; because the Doctor himself mustn’t find out who he really is…27 January 2013 at 19:05 #2013
No, both Joy and the guys at the beginning of the Snowmen do have a bigger purpose than a joke. They’re establishing for the audience that these are not nice aliens.
In a sense, the Silence may have a point about the Doctor – he’s genocidal. But since we see a Silence kill someone for just the fun of it (‘Why did you kill her?’ ‘Joy’), we know they’re the worse option.
Similarly with the snowmen – if we didn’t see them kill people, we wouldn’t know they were dangerous. Basically, all they do for the rest of the episode is stand around and look menacing.27 January 2013 at 16:48 #2001
Alex Kingston’s acting was one of the things I noticed when I rewatched. She did a brilliant job – first time, when I didn’t know the ending, she looked to be reacting naturally. Second time, when you know the ending, you can see how much River’s character is controlling things.
She keeps Amy away from the Tessalecta Doctor, comes up with a quick explanation about why the Doctor’s body needs to be incinerated and stops Rory and Amy from blurting everything out to younger Doctor. One of the things that fooled me the first time is that River does appear genuinely upset – but when you think that Amy and Rory are her parents, it becomes clear. She’s upset because she knows how much this is going to hurt her parents – and she can’t tell them anything. Yet.
No wonder she gives the Doctor that whacking great slap.27 January 2013 at 13:37 #1975
It sounds rather like the interview consisted of:
Interviewer: I’d like to ask you about Doctor Who.
JLC: I’m contractually required to say nothing at all about Doctor Who.
Interviewer: Errr, errr….25 January 2013 at 16:33 #1915
They broadcast the start of S6 on Easter weekend, and dated it as taking place on the Good Friday. And then they killed the Doctor… the Doctor various people believed was a god…
So yeah, if they’ve brought it forward, that sounds like someone looked at the BBC’s schedule and said ‘err, it’s important it broadcasts at Easter, because we’ve got references to Easter in the script’.24 January 2013 at 15:40 #1863
It’s always been my thought that while the most likely mental illness for humans is depression, the most likely mental illness for a Time Lord is megalomania.
They all seem to get it sooner or later. Even the Doctor’s had his moments. If the ‘twin Doctor’s’ theory turns out to be correct, I confidently expect the second Doctor to be a complete megalomaniac. 🙂21 January 2013 at 22:41 #1805
@phaseshift – almost certainly, though I couldn’t specify exactly which one. Not after five hours on a coach, anyway 🙂
The ‘blue’ police box is now copyright the BBC, isn’t it?21 January 2013 at 21:27 #1799
Funnily enough, I remember travelling on a coach up to Glasgow, and we passed one of the very last Police Boxes. To the great excitement of one small boy, who was leaping up and down on his seat, yelling ” Mummy, Mummy, it’s the Tardis! Mummy, IT’S THE TARDIS!”
The thing I most remember is an entire coach-load of adults smiling. And that no one, absolutely no one on that coach told that little boy ‘no, it isn’t’.20 January 2013 at 17:22 #1785
Yes, I noticed that the Victorian costume was closing in on Hartnell’s Edwardian costume. A ‘back to the beginning’ reboot is looking more and more likely…19 January 2013 at 18:29 #1757
@jimthefish – yes, I’d agree. I think the show had the most brilliant opening; we started with the audience seeing the most important event in the Doctor’s life, the one that changed everything for him. Ian and Barbara following Susan home, and his decision to kidnap them. This is what changed ‘the Doctor’ into ‘Doctor Who’.
And if you think of ‘the Doctor’ as possibly someone capable of becoming a Timelord like ‘the Master’, you can see how important that meeting may have been.
One of the things I’d love is for the 50th to refer back to that in some way, but maybe it’s always going to be a mystery. Why was the Doctor was so scared of discovery that he was willing to take these two apes with him? Rather than risk them talking about him.19 January 2013 at 16:40 #1743
Why do the movie-makers feel they have to give him a human heritage?
I’d guess it was the standard film-script advice – you need someone that your audience can identify with. Since most of the audience won’t be aliens, better to make Doctor Who a human scientist.
The TV version was startlingly brave for the time; the central character isn’t from our time or our planet. And later we find he isn’t even human. Contrast this with Star Trek, where the central character is from future-Iowa and the ‘alien’ on the bridge is half-human.19 January 2013 at 16:16 #1737
The thing you have to remember about the films: no TV repeats back in them days. So they didn’t bother too much about the TV version beyond borrowing the basic scenario. Though, even as a kid, I always found Invasion Earth tons better than Doctor Who and the Daleks.
There is a story that when they gave Bernard Cribbins his ‘wrap’ present for The End of Time, they gave him a picture of him playing Special Constable Tom Campbell back in 1966 – side-by-side with a picture of him playing Wilfred Mott in 2009. It was captioned ‘The Most Faithful Companion’.19 January 2013 at 01:35 #1697
Yes, @scaryb, you’re right. Clara was entertainment officer on the Alaska.
aaand another thing before I trot off to bed:
from Time of Angels: “What if we had ideas that could think for themselves; what if one day, our dreams no longer needed us? When these things occur and are held to be true the time will be upon us. The time of angels.”
From The Snowmen: “He dreamed you. How can you still exist?”
“Now the dream outlives the dreamer and can never die. Once I was the puppet, now I pull the strings.”
It occurs to me that one dream that has certainly outlived the dreamer is Doctor Who. And possibly the Doctor himself, in-universe, is another ‘dream that outlived the dreamer’.18 January 2013 at 23:52 #1691
Oh, and in keeping with the ‘mirroring’ theme: Clara’s “It’s smaller on the outside” is a mirror-image of the normal “It’s bigger on the inside”.18 January 2013 at 23:17 #1689
Anyway, whilst rewatching the episode (must be all the snow) I took the opportunity to pause on that newspaper.
As well as the reference to a 1930’s/1940’s Japanese Prime Minister, there’s also a reference to Prague, Jews, fascists and Germany. This also places the other article within WW2 (or just before).
And on the right hand side there’s an obviously faked article – you can see that the paragraph repeats.
It appears to be a story about the shrimp pickers dance – which would suggest the US. The visible names are Joseph Sumption, possibly a Mr Frye, Wrangell (Alaska), and Old Cy Lent.
I dunno if the other names have any significance, but ‘Cy Lent’ is definitely a teaser.15 January 2013 at 20:34 #1461
You’re doing great, Craig. 😀
The forum I help out on quite deliberately selected a database (sql and php) format rather than the standard forum software. Essentially, while we also have a lot of brief conversations, it’s extremely easy to link from one conversation to another. It’s also possible to switch a post from topic A to topic B – or even decide that this post belongs in topic A, B, and C – and cross reference it so it will show up in all those topics.
So we can start a thread on Doctor Who S7, wander on to general Moffatdom and end up on Sherlock – and it doesn’t matter. One of my jobs is switching things into the right conversation; I just go in and relabel the posts, cross referencing if it’s obvious one post is talking about Doctor Who AND Sherlock. I suppose the question I’d ask from experience of a very wide-ranging conversation is: is there a way for the mods to link between threads or even move posts over?
The main board is chronologically based; you’ve got the equivalent with the recent post sidebar.
Hope this is some help14 January 2013 at 15:53 #1427
I think that this season was the one where Moffat either wasn’t entirely sure he’d keep the job, or knew he had to grab his audience for his new Doctor. So he did a season that mirrors the lead up to the 50th, but was self-contained within the one season.
Every series since has been part of the lead-up to the 50th – which is why it hasn’t felt quite so great. We’re still only part-way through the story.
But yeah, there’s more to this story than first appears. The disruptions in time mirror the cracks in the universe, that ruddy spaceship and the identity of the pilot is never explained. And while they certainly reused built sets, they usually repainted/redressed to make it look different.
And the perception filter is big. Again. There’s a perception filter and everyone’s missing what’s in front of their nose.
But the chief joy of this episode is that it’s simply charming. The Doctor is a hilarious fish out of water, James Corden and Daisy Haggard play their love story beautifully, and the football fits seamlessly into the episode.12 January 2013 at 21:19 #1319
Just been rewatching The Lodger. The big thing that stands out from the pov of the 50th Anniversary is “somebody’s trying to build a TARDIS”, which is causing disruptions in time. Later we find out that the spaceship may have been connected to the Silence – but we still haven’t gone into the time travel element that was hinted at.
The other thing is the subtle little references to previous regenerations. There’s the Doctor/Craig head-butt transfer, of course, but also ‘nine’ is bad (on the TARDIS screen) and ‘five’ is better. The Eleventh Doctor reprises the Third’s shower scene. And the teapot is a Charles and Di wedding teapot, date 1981, same year as the first (brief) appearance of Peter Davison as the Fifth Doctor.
Previous Doctors. The further back you go in the regeneration number sequence, the better it is (Amy eventually ends up with ‘minus three’ when everything is resolved). And while the teapot isn’t anachronistic as such, it’s interesting to spot in light of the definitely anachronistic Japanese PM in The Snowmen.
Remember Rory’s ID badge? The one we were firmly informed was a production mistake when the entire web spotted it? The props department seems to be making an awful lot of these kind of mistakes.11 January 2013 at 20:41 #1239
So, anyway, I rewatched this on the repeat.
The portrayal of depression is very powerful, but for me the best thing about the episode was the explanation of Van Gogh’s work. Who he was, why he was important in art, and – especially in the Starry Night scene – what he was trying to show in his art. You can also see that the set and props people had gone to town, lovingly recreating the various pictures.
I have a bit of a problem with depth perception, so I don’t really ‘get’ paintings. It’s not that I can’t see them; it’s just that they might as well be wallpaper. Unless a picture tells a story, it’s just a pretty picture and I have absolutely no idea why people rave about, say, Sunflowers. So it was fantastic to have an explanation in child-friendly language. Oh, okay, he was trying to get the way they’re both living and dying at the same time. And he used lots of colour, because he saw the world as full of colour – it almost talked to him. And the animation of ‘Starry Night’ was excellent.
So I would rate this as the best of the ‘Doctor meets famous historical person’ episodes, in that it went back to the old Hartnell style of trying to be a bit educational.9 January 2013 at 13:18 #1019
Clearly acting with all those kids in Single Father made him extremely broody…9 January 2013 at 00:12 #961
Ten’s been quoted all over the place as saying he has no comment at all on the 50th show – so in the best Yes Minister tradition I take that as meaning he’s definitely in it!
There’s certainly a current joke that if an actor says they’re working on a project they can’t talk about – they’re in Doctor Who.8 January 2013 at 23:01 #933
Unless she’s both a representation of ‘Doctor Who’ and a mirror of ‘The Doctor’ (who isn’t yet ‘Doctor Who’). In which case, she’s got eight to ten regenerations to go. 🙂
Which makes me wonder if the 50th is about ‘The Doctor’ becoming ‘Doctor Who’.8 January 2013 at 22:55 #931
Given Luke’s ability to walk straight into any weirdness going, I suspect K-9 mk 4 is kept very busy indeed.8 January 2013 at 22:53 #929
Agreed. Given that it’s now thirty years since Tom Baker played the role, it realistically isn’t possible to have him on screen without some extensive phlebotinum to explain why the Fourth Doctor suddenly looks like he’s in his late seventies. They just about got away with it for Peter Davison, but he’s twenty years younger than Tom Baker.
On the other hand, a lot of the surviving actors who played the Doctor have been very happily occupied (in-between other work) doing audio stories for Big Finish. Vocally, there’s no problem.
So if we are to have all the incarnations, I’ll go with you @blenkinsopthebrave – it’s either going to be still photos again (reprising Eleven’s entrance in The Eleventh Hour – possibly coming full circle as Eleven’s exit?) or they’ll have them as Out of Shot or Voice Over.8 January 2013 at 22:36 #911
Talking about the Doctor’s most constant companion (aka Sexy); I’ve often wondered (usually whenever listening to the song) whether they played the Muse song ‘Supermassive Black Hole’ instead of ‘Starlight’ because ‘Starlight’ gives away far too much.
This ship is taking me far away
Far away from the memories
Of the people who care if I live or die
I will be chasing the starlight
Until the end of my life
I don’t know if it’s worth it anymore
Hold you in my arms
I just wanted to hold
You in my arms
You electrify my life
Let’s conspire to ignite
All the souls that would die just to feel alive
But I’ll never let you go
If you promised not to fade away
Never fade away
Our hopes and expectations
Black holes and revelations
Our hopes and expectations
Black holes and revelations
Hold you in my arms
I just wanted to hold
You in my arms
The Doctor and the TARDIS? Or the Doctor and his companions? Discuss.8 January 2013 at 11:44 #749
Searchability on Google tends to grow with a) number of posts and b) the linkages to other sites.
I’m a frequent poster-and-technical-assistant on another smallish site (Joss Whedon based, though for some reason we discuss Steven Moffat’s shows a lot 🙂 ) and that has now migrated to top of the list if you search for it by name.
So I wouldn’t worry too much about being way down the lists when we’re less than ten days old.8 January 2013 at 09:44 #723
The prop-maker isn’t going to go to all the bother of mocking up a newspaper page from 1890s and then reference a completely different period for the other story.
When I was looking up the relevant Prime Ministers, I thought ‘there’s no way this can be a mistake’. The names are utterly different, and Karoe Fumimaro would’ve been aged one in 1892. Plus, it’s unlikely a report from an 1930’s paper would look the same as an 1892 paper – not to a prop maker.7 January 2013 at 23:47 #689
It reminds me of The Wedding of River Song; you know, when all the times have collapsed together because breaking the fixed point broke time?
So the Japanese PM of 1941 is co-existing with 1892. Hmmm… those dates are 49 years apart.
The Bloomsbury Lane is a bit of a joke – Bloomsbury’s chokka with universities, the British Museum, SOAS etc. In the late Victorian/Edwardian era all self-respecting intelligences hung out in Bloomsbury (especially Great ones).
Sadly, the N31 bus doesn’t go through there, though. It stops at Camden Town.7 January 2013 at 22:40 #673
@juniperfish – we’ll just have to agree to differ. 😀 It’s probably because I’ve seen him do very different roles.7 January 2013 at 22:37 #671
I always thought the Doctor’s explanation about how the pollen (which is a hallucinogen when it heats up) just happened to float into the TARDIS was a bit … feeble. Sort of ‘I have no idea how that got in here, honestly’ feeble.
Sort of ‘isn’t it strange I knew exactly what was causing our hallucinations’ feeble. 🙂7 January 2013 at 22:25 #665
The poor man’s called Simm. 🙂 And Tony Ainley lasted all the way from Tom Baker to Sylvester McCoy, so it really is up to Steven Moffat.
John Simm is a good enough actor, and Steven Moffat a good enough writer, that they could presumably move the Master to a characterisation that’s somewhat less barking than it was under RTD. Fun as it was, I don’t want the Master like that all the time.
While Steven Moffat was still on Twitter, his response to the Benedict Cumberbatch rumour was ‘he’ll have to wait his turn’. Which did sound like he still thought of John Simm as the current Master (subject to availability).
Though, Rule One. Of course.7 January 2013 at 21:59 #653
Eight’s canon. His picture appeared in ‘The Next Doctor’ AND ‘The Eleventh Hour’. He couldn’t be more canon if Nine, Ten or Eleven had pointed to him and said ‘Oy! And that’s what I used to look like’. 🙂
The Master, okay? If they bring the Time Lords back, the Master has to come with them. And while the little pepperpots aren’t compulsory for anniversary specials, I think all the Anniversaries so far have included the Time Lords to at least some extent.
It does occur to me that – since we’re on Eleven and Matt Smith did once want to be a pro footballer – we could have a ‘Doctors Eleven’ match.7 January 2013 at 17:17 #617
Rather like the shot of Ailsa Berk in the background, with a warm purple puffa jacket – and the expression of a drill sergeant.
Cybermen … ATTEN-HUT!
But yes, my attitude to spoilers: if it’s on the BBC website, the Radio Times or in the trailer, it’s no longer a spoiler. It’s information the production team want out there.6 January 2013 at 21:45 #571
Do we have a ‘general’ general forum yet?
In the meantime, http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-gas-goes-below-absolute-zero-1.12146 sounds very Who-ish5 January 2013 at 23:01 #487
My initial reaction, however, was ‘Oooh doesn’t Matt look young’.
Both David Tennant and Matt Smith have remarked what a physically demanding role The Doctor is. It’s pretty noticeable that David Tennant looked nearly a decade older by the end of his run – watch The Christmas Invasion; the difference is amazing.
So I’m not too surprised that Matt Smith is also looking a lot older as his run continues.
I loved the new make up for the Silurians; it allows them to use top-class actors rather than top-class physical theatre experts. I don’t think a modern audience would have tolerated Pertwee-style Silurians; currently I’m rewatching The Daemons, and while it’s well acted, Bok’s costume is a bit … bad.
I also enjoyed the way Chris Chibnall clearly did a wee bit of research into lizards and found that – in certain lizard species – the females are the aggressive ones. And then ran with it.5 January 2013 at 16:01 #443
I don’t see any historical reason they’d want to do it live: unlike Quatermass, Who was just late enough historically that it never went out live.
Maybe the rumours come from it being ‘live streamed’ on the Internet? Or Matt Smith’s comments about ‘live events’ surrounding the anniversary?2 January 2013 at 16:36 #195
Dunno, but ‘through the Looking Glass’ has been referenced. In The Power of Three, the Doctor says it to Amy.2 January 2013 at 15:20 #189
So looking at the ‘Clara – or the original Clara – is a Timelord*’ idea:
She’s of super-genius intelligence. Tick.
Not exactly modest. Tick.
‘Acute sense of time.’ Claimed, so tick.
Telepathic abilities. Inferred, so tick.
Ability to regenerate: we haven’t seen it and ‘Clara’ looked extremely dead in The Snowmen. Melody thought it was ‘easy’. Cross – but it doesn’t destroy the entire premise, because Jenny took ages to regenerate, and even then it didn’t follow the normal pattern.
Conclusion: she might be a Timelord split through time; which for some reason means she can’t regenerate – the parts have to be reassembled.
She’s certainly displaying a number of characteristics which ‘mirror’ the Doctor. The mirroring might be deliberately created (she’s a program or weapon) – or she’s a descendent. Either via Susan (current status: missing presumed dead) or via Jenny.
(Timelord being defined as someone from Gallifrey, cloned from someone from Gallifrey, descended from someone from Gallifrey, or in certain circumstances, conceived in the TARDIS).2 January 2013 at 14:47 #179
Maybe she is a telepath (even if she’s not fully aware of it).
Errmm… oh, wow.
Because Susan had/has unusually strong telepathic abilities. It was a major plot point in The Sensorites.1 January 2013 at 18:43 #145
I think Clara kissing the Doctor puts the kibosh on that one, how could you explain it to the kiddiwinks?
No, that’s relatively simple. Clara discovers the Doctor is her grandfather. And screams “Nooo! I kissed my granddad!”
The kids would laugh their socks off. Especially if the Doctor replies “I know. The last time I did that, she turned out to be my mother-in-law.”1 January 2013 at 15:26 #137
I don’t really go for the Doctor’s daughter by River – I still think there was a reason Steven Moffat wanted Jenny alive. And Oswin referred to her ‘Mum’, who was having a birthday.
But I’d agree that ‘family’ is a really important theme for Moffat. So it’s quite likely Clara Oswin Oswald is somehow ‘family’.
Okay; looking back over the first episodes of this season, I note that the female voice over for two of the computers has still not been credited. That’s got to be significant; the street-cred of Who at the moment is enormous – I can’t think of any actor who wouldn’t want that credit on their CV.
So I still think those voice-overs were done by Jenna-Louise Coleman. Anyone found evidence to the contrary?
So she may be a person fractured in time. And she may also be inhabiting the TARDIS.
Regarding the computers: Oswin – Operating System WINdows. Oswald – Object-Oriented Software for the Analysis of Longitudinal Data. Clara – Claranet, a very big European ISP. So far all her ‘genuine’ names are based around computing. COO = Computer: object orientated?
Another thought: Clara and Montague are both Irish names (Clara is an Irish town) – and ‘Gallifrey’ is often mistaken for ‘somewhere in Ireland’ when Brits first hear the name. Is Clara also a Gallifreyan name, and that’s why the Doctor liked it so much?31 December 2012 at 13:08 #61
Bit of a struggle with the name function, but Bluesqueakpip now squeaking.